Abbey line departure boards and signalling diagram

[zwk500]

Surely rather than skip-stopping two small stations, you could choose one and close the other? To get the run time we need - although it sounds like it would be tight anyway. Not like there would be the investment to close both and build an equidistant one, as has been suggested for Marston. You may as well do the works for that.

I wonder if an hourly service (downgrade in waiting but more memorable and regular) - could merge with the hourly now-only Watford to Croydon. Would have to be a 4 car 350 but otherwise compatible re platforms/lines at Watford - and of course you can choose any minute to depart/arrive to fit the WCML times, as it's the only game in town on the Abbey line. Might give the Abbey line a little more range in direct destinations and connections, not least Shepherds Bush / Westfield - and a bit more visibility and thus usage. Not the quickest way from Croydon to St Albans of course!

Any any future increases if ever pathed in could use P10 - as could more Euston shuttles.

Getting the Abbey line caught up in WCML traffic and the conflict move at Watford South would be big issues with this plan.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Aug 2022 ==

2. As a consequence of point 1, the plan cannot be regarded as anything other than a step towards closure of the line.

As has been pointed out, this is a leap of reasoning that simply doesn't stack up.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Posted 22 July : It is anticipated that HCC/DfT may announce in September a consultation on closing the Abbey line.

Says who? Evidence? If the DaFT wanted to close lines, there are plenty that'd be in the queue before that one.

1. The impact of service cancellation is greater when the service frequency is every 60 minutes.

That is true, but a more robust service is less likely to suffer cancellation.

2. As a consequence of point 1, the plan cannot be regarded as anything other than a step towards closure of the line.

Hardly.

 

[cle]

Getting the Abbey line caught up in WCML traffic and the conflict move at Watford South would be big issues with this plan.

Isn't this much the same move as terminating at Watford Junction p10? And if you're late, you kill the Abbey piece, or run non-stop to St Albans (or 1 stop) and back.

 

[zwk500]

Isn't this much the same move as terminating at Watford Junction p10?

The difference here is that you're terminating, so you can afford to wait 3 minutes for an Up train before you arrive.

And if you're late, you kill the Abbey piece, or run non-stop to St Albans (or 1 stop) and back.

Which improves the Abbey line service how? Given what Bald Rick has said about most journeys being contained to the line, surely the priority is on keeping the branch service going.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Isn't this much the same move as terminating at Watford Junction p10? And if you're late, you kill the Abbey piece, or run non-stop to St Albans (or 1 stop) and back.

That may prove an issue - the Southern service hasn't in the past been known for punctuality, though that was more because the turnarounds at both ends were very short (<10 mins each end on a 2 hour journey, in the peaks at least, though I think you got about 15 mins at the MKC end off peak), it now has 5 minutes at Clapham but a massive 30 at Watford so should be very punctual. But if you dropped the St Albans back to hourly (a move I'd support), which you'd have to do to interwork, then it'd get more reliable on its own. But there's not enough slack in hourly on each to save a unit (2 on the Southern), you can't quite get Watford-Snorbens and back in half an hour.

If most traffic is to Watford town centre then the thing to join it to would be the Overground to connect it to Watford High St etc, but you'd need to build a very, very expensive flyover which could never be justified.

 

[zwk500]

That may prove an issue - the Southern service hasn't in the past been known for punctuality, though that was more because the turnarounds at both ends were very short (<10 mins each end on a 2 hour journey, in the peaks at least, though I think you got about 15 mins at the MKC end off peak), it now has 5 minutes at Clapham but a massive 30 at Watford so should be very punctual. But if you dropped the St Albans back to hourly (a move I'd support), which you'd have to do to interwork, then it'd get more reliable on its own. But there's not enough slack in hourly on each to save a unit (2 on the Southern) without changing the WCML paths.

Personally, if money were not an object, I'd rebuild P9/10 at Watford Jn to turn the current Up Slow into a center terminating line and put the Up line on a loop around it, a la Tring or MKC. Double-Ended would be most helpful, although even single ended would help. It would require a fair bit of work to the station though.
If that isn't possible, then converting the headshunt at Wembley Central into a 4- or even 8-car bay would allow that service to terminate without touching the WCML slows, but it does restrict the connectivity to only the DC/Bakerloo lines.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Personally, if money were not an object, I'd rebuild P9/10 at Watford Jn to turn the current Up Slow into a center terminating line and put the Up line on a loop around it, a la Tring or MKC. Double-Ended would be most helpful, although even single ended would help. It would require a fair bit of work to the station though.
If that isn't possible, then converting the headshunt at Wembley Central into a 4- or even 8-car bay would allow that service to terminate without touching the WCML slows, but it does restrict the connectivity to only the DC/Bakerloo lines.

WFJ would probably be one of the easier stations to fiddle with the slow-line layout of, as all there is to that side of the station is a massive car park and some temporary buildings. But the fast lines are the issue, being in the way of getting the Snorbens into Watford town centre, and expensive solutions aren't worth it for poorly used branch lines. If you were going to spend a fortune on anything relating to the Southern, it'd logically be on reinstating platforms on the WCML at Willesden including fast-line loops so all LNR services could call, which would allow the Southern to be withdrawn entirely and people to connect onto the far more frequent Overground services to get to Clapham etc, plus improve connectivity to Old Oak for HS2 and Heathrow.

 

[mr_jrt]

In the context of the redevelopment of Watford Junction that will see that car park covered in high rises, I actually asked the previous MP to intervene and try and get the plans adjusted to preserve a strip of land alongside the railway for converting platform 10 into a loop. He said he was told by Network Rail that capacity at Watford Junction was ample for the long term future of the station and more platforms weren't required.

...which made me chuckle when news stories started later cropping up about the station being at capacity.

Watford Observer

The London Northwestern Railway has explained why there are fewer weekday peak time services between Watford Junction and London Euston.

West Midlands Trains, that operates both West Midlands Railway and London Northwestern Railway services, made the changes that came into effect yesterday (May 15).

This will reduce the number of peak time trains from both Watford Junction and Bushey, with some readers questioning the new timetable.
Commuters are advised to check the new timetable
According to the rail company, the reduction is a result of changes to the Southern timetables, which has reduced platform availability at Watford Junction.

...guess the lure of selling off all that land for redevelopment is just too attractive. Is it even worth building a skyscraper unless you're hemming in a railway to prevent expansion?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Really St Albans should be moved into 10 rather than half way across the car park. Do that before building stuff

 

[The Planner]

In the context of the redevelopment of Watford Junction that will see that car park covered in high rises, I actually asked the previous MP to intervene and try and get the plans adjusted to preserve a strip of land alongside the railway for converting platform 10 into a loop. He said he was told by Network Rail that capacity at Watford Junction was ample for the long term future of the station and more platforms weren't required.

...which made me chuckle when news stories started later cropping up about the station being at capacity.

Watford Observer


...guess the lure of selling off all that land for redevelopment is just too attractive. Is it even worth building a skyscraper unless you're hemming in a railway to prevent expansion?

Its at capacity for passengers due to the crap subway.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Its at capacity for passengers due to the crap subway.

Wouldn't it be fairly easy to, er, build a footbridge?

 

[zwk500]

Wouldn't it be fairly easy to, er, build a footbridge?

Somebody still has to pay for it. Would also need to be accessible, and I'm not sure if there's room to put a lift and staircase on the existing open areas of platform without getting a derogation for platform width. Alternative would be to knock down some waiting rooms, which will be less than popular I suspect.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Would also need to be accessible

It wouldn't. The existing subway can be used for wheelchair access.

The waiting rooms are interesting - I can't recall seeing that sort of "indoor platform" approach anywhere else in the UK, but they do constrain space a bit.

 

[cle]

The whole thing needs a rebuild - and potentially an eastern exit which could help access - even to the P9/10 island which is the busiest especially for waiting.

Good that there is development, and I hope it helps the case for future spending / investment, but should really consider the station too.

I take the points on the Abbey and turnarounds - perhaps that would be a better solution (Southern merge) if the loops/double tracking was there - but then we are full circle to the investment not being worth it for the ridership. My suggestion was about instigating new rides though, not just about servicing the existing patterns (which are short and thus compete with bus/bike/car/cabs) - services down to the WLL would be whole new journey creation possibilities.

 

[zwk500]

My suggestion was about instigating new rides though [...] services down to the WLL would be whole new journey creation possibilities.

Would they? Given St Albans has thameslink providing a far easier and quicker cross-London connection without the tube, the only journey opportunity the WLL even remotely offers is for people going to Westfield. I don't imagine people from St Albans and Watford would make that journey all too often. It's not as if Watford is lacking for shops (or wasn't, pre covid).

A journey might be physically possible but that doesn't mean it's going to be universally popular.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Its at capacity for passengers due to the crap subway.

The whole set up at Watford Junction is poor - the subway is a major constraint , the passenger facilities well below modern standards - tiled waiting rooms (often cold) , metal seating and a cramped ticket hall area. The taxi area and the developing world approach to the car park under the tunnel , let alone the bus interchange.

And that's before we talk about railway functionality , e.g a missing Watford North Junction for too long.

Basically needs some serious investment - in the interim , some heavy cleaning and maintenance of that would be a start.

 

[Bald Rick]

Surely rather than skip-stopping two small stations, you could choose one and close the other?

knowing the area very well, it’s not that easy to get between the two on foot, (much longer than the railway) and requires crossing the A5. Skipping them alternately keeps both with a service, and enables those living in between to choose if they want to do that walk if they wan ththe ‘extra’ service from the ‘other’ station.

I wonder if an hourly service (downgrade in waiting but more memorable and regular) - could merge with the hourly now-only Watford to Croydon.

it’s been a long held ambition of Abfly to have through services to London. The issue is that a delay on the abbey line, for any reason, would cause the ex WCML service to be stood on the down slow waiting the single line to be cleared. That is not something you want on the WCML.

As a consequence of point 1, the plan cannot be regarded as anything other than a step towards closure of the line.

in the opinion of ALPA, which I assume has a membership of 1.

Presumably in the (much) wider Hertsrail proposal resolving the Abbey line is the first of many campaigns. Could we call it ‘Campaign A.’ ? Perhaps there’s a suitable acronym.

Wouldn't it be fairly easy to, er, build a footbridge?

not that easy unfortunately. Platform widths are the issue. The current platform widths alongside the subway are horrendously non compliant. (And yes, I know it seems awfully counter intuitive to say that you can’t build a footbridge to relieve passenger congestion and improve safety on the platforms because it narrows the platforms a bit and reduces passenger safety).

 

[zwk500]

it’s been a long held ambition of Abfly to have through services to London. The issue is that a delay on the abbey line, for any reason, would cause the ex WCML service to be stood on the down slow waiting the single line to be cleared. That is not something you want on the WCML.

Could that not be solved by putting in a second platform at Watford Junction? I guess that if you're spending the money to put in a loop it may as well be somewhere that allows the 30-minute service.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Could that not be solved by putting in a second platform at Watford Junction? I guess that if you're spending the money to put in a loop it may as well be somewhere that allows the 30-minute service.

I guess you know the business case for a loop "failed" , - but the real issue (for now) is that an Abbey line train going through to Euston would / could only be a 4 car so not a good use for a WCML path.

The Thameslink offer is so good , such a service would only be of benefit really for Garston and so on. "Cross country" the service via Radlett , let alone St Albans is very superior.

Someone mentioned links to Westfields etc - a very small market and from SAC best served by the TK and an easy change at West Hampstead onto the Overground. I know people who do that move every now and then - but not often.

Finally, for some obscure reason (and I know the line very well - having managed it and travelled on since about 1990) , I do not think I have ever seen a single passenger going from Garston to SAA - the "draw" is clearly to Watford and not the Cathedral city.

"A local line for local people"

 

[zwk500]

I guess you know the business case for a loop "failed" , - but the real issue (for now) is that an Abbey line train going through to Euston would / could only be a 4 car so not a good use for a WCML path.

The Thameslink offer is so good , such a service would only be of benefit really for Garston and so on. "Cross country" the service via Radlett , let alone St Albans is very superior.

Someone mentioned links to Westfields etc - a very small market and from SAC best served by the TK and an easy change at West Hampstead onto the Overground. I know people who do that move every now and then - but not often.

Finally, for some obscure reason (and I know the line very well - having managed it and travelled on since about 1990) , I do not think I have ever seen a single passenger going from Garston to SAA - the "draw" is clearly to Watford and not the Cathedral city.

"A local line for local people"

Thanks for this insight

 

[Richardr]

I wonder if an hourly service (downgrade in waiting but more memorable and regular) - could merge with the hourly now-only Watford to Croydon. Would have to be a 4 car 350 but otherwise compatible re platforms/lines at Watford - and of course you can choose any minute to depart/arrive to fit the WCML times, as it's the only game in town on the Abbey line. Might give the Abbey line a little more range in direct destinations and connections, not least Shepherds Bush / Westfield - and a bit more visibility and thus usage. Not the quickest way from Croydon to St Albans of course!

Exactly what sort of demand would there be from St Albans to go anywhere beyond Watford on such a service?

Given that the current shuttle is (in my experience) pretty reliable, in what world is an hourly service to Croydon from St Albans via Watford going to have any sort of reliability?

 

[Bald Rick]

Could that not be solved by putting in a second platform at Watford Junction? I guess that if you're spending the money to put in a loop it may as well be somewhere that allows the 30-minute service.

Yes you could put a second platform in - at the expense of the stone terminal. And it still wouldn’t enable a half hourly service.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

At best , in the good days pre 2019 , a good day on the Abbey was about a 1000 passengers.

I got the PORTIS flows analyzed for some random days , and amazingly most journeys were very local - but some very odd ones (one offs) - as one would expect like Bangor , Warrington etc - but in those days there was a much more Inter City service calling at Watford to pick up and set down.

Apart from London , Harrow seemed reasonably popular. I hate to say - but a lot of the remaining business travels free , with Oyster swipes at Watford to get to London. Personal views of course.

 

[The Planner]

Wouldn't it be fairly easy to, er, build a footbridge?

Somebody still has to pay for it. Would also need to be accessible, and I'm not sure if there's room to put a lift and staircase on the existing open areas of platform without getting a derogation for platform width. Alternative would be to knock down some waiting rooms, which will be less than popular I suspect.

Footbridge is already designed and costed, DfT have to approve it, they aren't doing that.

I guess you know the business case for a loop "failed" , - but the real issue (for now) is that an Abbey line train going through to Euston would / could only be a 4 car so not a good use for a WCML path.

Up Slow Loop was looked at for the re-signalling, got canned early on, it wasn't as easy or cheap as people make out.

 

[Verulamius]

Finally, for some obscure reason (and I know the line very well - having managed it and travelled on since about 1990) , I do not think I have ever seen a single passenger going from Garston to SAA - the "draw" is clearl

In the evening, on the 18.15 from Watford Junction quite a few get on Watford North/Garston to head to St Albans. They look like they are going out for the evening.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

In the evening, on the 18.15 from Watford Junction quite a few get on Watford North/Garston to head to St Albans. They look like they are going out for the evening.

Plenty of welcoming pubs on a Summer's evening.....

 

[Bald Rick]

Up Slow Loop was looked at for the re-signalling, got canned early on, it wasn't as easy or cheap as people make out.

as was a fast line loop during WCRM. Quickly ruled out.

In the evening, on the 18.15 from Watford Junction quite a few get on Watford North/Garston to head to St Albans. They look like they are going out for the evening.

I used to be a regular on the equivalent train about 10 years ago. And yes quite a few would get on at Watford North, it seemed some of them were workers in the adjacent industrial park Heading home.

anyway, this morning’s count on the prime peak train for connections to Harrow and Euston (to get to Euston for around 0830) - about 80. Roughly 30 went for the London train and 4 went for the connection northbound (Including a family of three on what looked like a day trip to the Commonwealth Games).

 

[cle]

Side note but I don't think Westfield is the be-all and end-all of attractions on the WLL. There is a lot going on - it's access to a swathe of West London folks might visit or work in - and even at Shepherds Bush, there is more besides the mall, connections via bus and Central line, lots of employment and entertainment in the area. Olympia is in the catchment for a lot of Hammersmith employment, plus the Centre itself, and both West Brompton and Imperial Wharf see a lot of usage.

And potentially one day, all that OOC will enable by way of connections - likely more for the West in this case. And Heathrow too.

And then of course, there is Clapham Junction which is by far and away the biggest draw - giving connections across the South and a busy destination itself. There are myriad reasons why people could, and do, use it - and how a direct connection to the line could instigate new journeys from anywhere. As we often see with reopenings or newer services.

People are visiting London itself far more than they cross it (thinking St Albans to Croydon or Brighton) - I'm not suggesting the WLL as another cross-London link.

 

[Bald Rick]

And potentially one day, all that OOC will enable by way of connections - likely more for the West in this case. And Heathrow too.

But St Albans to most connections available from OOC is one change (and would be quicker) via a walk from St P to Euston or change at Farringdon. The market for abbey line branch stations to OOC for connections is going to miniscule.

Joinig the Abbey line to the WLL service is a solution looking for a problem. More accurately creating a problem to solve a non existent one.

 

[RailEnable]

I am unable to relate to the account given of a meeting, nor are we told where the information came from.

(post 13 in response to post 6)

it’s not a proposal. It’s confirmed and happening - the timetable is written. You may as well oppose the tide.

This concerns the plan to reduce service frequency on the line. I doubt a public official would say that. Presumably based on an email from Abfly.

None of us, including myself, are supporters of the Abbey line unless we make an effort to be sincere.

This post has been edited since the situation may change with the passing of time.

ALPA was created following failure of negotiation with Abfly. At the time of writing this, anyone who has received an email from Abfly in relation to matters discussed on this forum is invited to forward it to ALPA. Further details are provided on the ALPA website.

If, at the time of reading this, you are unable to find on the ALPA website an invitation to forward emails from Abfly then there is no longer an invitation to do so.